Talk about your review-proof films. Avengers: Age of
Ultron hit U.S. theaters in the past few weeks and along with its international
box-office take should top a billion dollars by the time you read this review.
Since no review would make much of a difference, least of all mine, there is no
reason to rush to publish.

I will start off by saying I was a big fan of the first
Avengers film, having written two reviews of the movie for the blog, once after
seeing it in 3D IMAX and once after watching it a third time at home prior to
the second phase of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. I even refer in my first
review that “bigger does mean better,” something that I often say is quite the
opposite in sequels. Too often the sequels are over-the-top follow ups to the
original, thinking the only justification for existing is to deliver a bigger
story that the first one. The problem is that most of the times, what gets lost
in the bigger presentation is the thing that made the first film such an
appealing winner. Sadly, Avengers: Age of Ultron does this to its own
detriment.

It doesn’t take more than a casual viewing of the MCU to
realize that with every success, there has been a bigger budget and more
special effects. There is no more building Iron Man in a cave with a bunch of
scraps. Everything now is machine-made, computer designed and highly polished.
And as in Iron Man 3, when it was decided that multiple Iron Mans were better
than the one, now we have a seemingly never-ending supply of Ultrons, the main
villain of the piece. More I won’t say, in case, gasp, you haven’t yet seen the
film.

To spice things up, Whedon has written a script that
throws in a few surprises, some good, and some bad. There is still a lot of
humor in the film, which helps offset the tension that builds, but sometimes
the story/character motivations seem to be more for off-screen reasons than
perhaps the realities of the story.

As an example, there is no Pepper Potts, who has been by
Tony Stark’s side for the entire MCU. Not that I really miss her in the film,
but her absence is most likely due to contractual reasons and given a throwaway
line of explanation. The same with Thor’s earth-bound love, Jane Foster, who
seems to only appear in Thor-centric films and is otherwise always away on
research. Again, there are enough cameos in this film that another, by Natalie Portman,
isn’t needed or missed.

Other than that, Hawkeye (Jeremy Renner) gets an
unexpected backstory, which almost seems to be a plot convenience more than
anything else. And a relationship blooms between two members of team Avengers
that I honestly didn’t see coming from the previous films in the MCU.

The main characters seem much more comfortable with each
other now, which if they are really a team would be a sign of the comradery
that develops in battle tested groups. But there is still an underlining sense
of distrust that never quite goes away. And for good reason as it turns out.

There are also some new characters that are added to the
mix, a few of which will no doubt return in the next promised edition of the
series. Again, I don’t want to give too much away, but I think they will
definitely make for an interesting mix when the Avengers return in their own
film in 2018.

Ultron (James Spader) is a pretty good villain.

For a villain, Ultron seems to be pretty good one and
James Spader was a great choice. He has always been an interesting actor to
watch and has given some really great performances and still does on The
Blacklist TV series. But the plot and Ultron’s motivation seems as old as the
Star Trek episode The Changeling (1968).

And there is the new big budget cliché, that Age of
Ultron falls victim to, of destroying a city, a trend that dates back to the
Transformers going to Chicago in Dark of the Moon (2011) and Superman laying
waste to Metropolis in Man of Steel (2013). Here it happens twice, once to a
city in Africa and once to a town in Sokovia, a fictional Eastern European
country.

If it seems like we’ve seen this plot and its outcome before, that’s
because we have.

Part of the problem with the MCU is that going in we
already know that Ultron, no matter how powerful a villain and no matter how
fool-proof the plan, will not succeed. How else can Marvel already be planning
for Avengers 3, which will be a two-parter, another new big budget cliché in
itself? (Thanks Harry Potter). But we kind of knew that going into The Avengers
as well, as the second phase was already planned out. So why doesn’t it work as
well this time?

First, this is a much slicker film, perhaps too slick
when compared to its predecessor. Take for example, the motorcycle sequence
shown on the Agents of S.H.I.E.L.D. show the week of its release. There is
really no danger of Black Widow (Scarlett Johansson) being hurt as her
motorcycle falls from a jet and then maneuvers its way through the thick
traffic of Seoul. Everything seems too choreographed and CGI-ed to be
believable in the least. Her character is turning into one that possesses
whatever talent is required at the moment: Need her to fly a plane, she’s an
expert; need her to fight in battle, she’s a good soldier; need stunt
motorcycle-riding, she’s your gal. How can we lose if she’s on our side?

Second, is the problem with hype, in that things rarely
live up to their own (see also the Fight of the Century: Floyd Mayweather, Jr.
vs. Manny Pacquiao which took place during opening weekend). Leaving The
Avengers in 2013 was sort of like leaving Spider-Man 2 when I saw it in 2004. I
couldn’t wait to see it again and did so the following weekend. The Avengers
was the same way. However, after Spider-Man 3 (2007) I wasn’t in as big of a
hurry. In the three years between films I could only imagine having that same
rush when the credits kicked in, but that film fell with a certain thud.

Avengers: Age of Ultron doesn’t land with a thud, but it
is not nearly as satisfying as The Avengers had been. After Spider-Man 3, it
was clear that it was time for Sam Raimi to move on. He had given his all for
the franchise, but for a number of reasons, some out of his control, his best
work on the series was behind him. The same is true of Whedon’s work on The
Avengers. Maybe he should have quit after the first one. In this case, bigger
was not better.